Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] initscripts: Properly handle new timestamp format
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 07:43 -0700, Gary Thomas wrote: Recent changes have attempted to make consistant use of /etc/timestamp In particular 5aab665 initscripts: Make /etc/timestamp consistent again. 173a48f image.bbclass: Ensure timestamp matches format used in initscripts after recent changes This new format can cause problems as the value is too large for most [32 bit] machines. Work around this by only comparing the MMDD portion (which does fit in 32 bits). Also, the new format is not directly compatible with the 'date' command line, so it must be reformatted for use. Signed-off-by: Gary Thomas g...@mlbassoc.com --- .../initscripts/initscripts-1.0/bootmisc.sh|4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) I merged the changes to busybox in relation to this. Is this patch still needed? Cheers, Richard ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] initscripts: Properly handle new timestamp format
On 2012-03-01 07:59, Richard Purdie wrote: On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 07:43 -0700, Gary Thomas wrote: Recent changes have attempted to make consistant use of /etc/timestamp In particular 5aab665 initscripts: Make /etc/timestamp consistent again. 173a48f image.bbclass: Ensure timestamp matches format used in initscripts after recent changes This new format can cause problems as the value is too large for most [32 bit] machines. Work around this by only comparing the MMDD portion (which does fit in 32 bits). Also, the new format is not directly compatible with the 'date' command line, so it must be reformatted for use. Signed-off-by: Gary Thomasg...@mlbassoc.com --- .../initscripts/initscripts-1.0/bootmisc.sh|4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) I merged the changes to busybox in relation to this. Is this patch still needed? Let me check - I didn't see the related busybox change. -- Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates |Embedded world ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] initscripts: Properly handle new timestamp format
On 2012-03-01 08:11, Gary Thomas wrote: On 2012-03-01 07:59, Richard Purdie wrote: On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 07:43 -0700, Gary Thomas wrote: Recent changes have attempted to make consistant use of /etc/timestamp In particular 5aab665 initscripts: Make /etc/timestamp consistent again. 173a48f image.bbclass: Ensure timestamp matches format used in initscripts after recent changes This new format can cause problems as the value is too large for most [32 bit] machines. Work around this by only comparing the MMDD portion (which does fit in 32 bits). Also, the new format is not directly compatible with the 'date' command line, so it must be reformatted for use. Signed-off-by: Gary Thomasg...@mlbassoc.com --- .../initscripts/initscripts-1.0/bootmisc.sh | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) I merged the changes to busybox in relation to this. Is this patch still needed? Let me check - I didn't see the related busybox change. I missed the busybox change because there was no PR bump :-( The problem with the change turning off CONFIG_FEATURE_DATE_COMPAT is that now 'date' from busybox works one way and 'date' from coreutils works another. Using coreutils: root@cobra8148p81:~# date 201203011520 date: invalid date `201203011520' root@cobra8148p81:~# date 030115202012 Thu Mar 1 15:20:00 UTC 2012 root@cobra8148p81:~# ls -l /bin/date lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 Mar 1 15:14 /bin/date - date.coreutils Using busybox: root@cobra8148p81:~# ln -s /bin/busybox /tmp/date root@cobra8148p81:~# /tmp/date 201203011520 Thu Mar 1 15:20:00 UTC 2012 I think the best thing would be to turn CONFIG_FEATURE_DATE_COMPAT back on along with my reformatting change. I can make an updated patch if you agree. -- Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates |Embedded world ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] initscripts: Properly handle new timestamp format
On 2012-03-01 08:44, Richard Purdie wrote: On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 08:27 -0700, Gary Thomas wrote: On 2012-03-01 08:11, Gary Thomas wrote: On 2012-03-01 07:59, Richard Purdie wrote: On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 07:43 -0700, Gary Thomas wrote: Recent changes have attempted to make consistant use of /etc/timestamp In particular 5aab665 initscripts: Make /etc/timestamp consistent again. 173a48f image.bbclass: Ensure timestamp matches format used in initscripts after recent changes This new format can cause problems as the value is too large for most [32 bit] machines. Work around this by only comparing the MMDD portion (which does fit in 32 bits). Also, the new format is not directly compatible with the 'date' command line, so it must be reformatted for use. Signed-off-by: Gary Thomasg...@mlbassoc.com --- .../initscripts/initscripts-1.0/bootmisc.sh | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) I merged the changes to busybox in relation to this. Is this patch still needed? Let me check - I didn't see the related busybox change. I missed the busybox change because there was no PR bump :-( The problem with the change turning off CONFIG_FEATURE_DATE_COMPAT is that now 'date' from busybox works one way and 'date' from coreutils works another. Using coreutils: root@cobra8148p81:~# date 201203011520 date: invalid date `201203011520' root@cobra8148p81:~# date 030115202012 Thu Mar 1 15:20:00 UTC 2012 root@cobra8148p81:~# ls -l /bin/date lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 Mar 1 15:14 /bin/date - date.coreutils Using busybox: root@cobra8148p81:~# ln -s /bin/busybox /tmp/date root@cobra8148p81:~# /tmp/date 201203011520 Thu Mar 1 15:20:00 UTC 2012 I think the best thing would be to turn CONFIG_FEATURE_DATE_COMPAT back on along with my reformatting change. I can make an updated patch if you agree. Is this going to cause us a problem in real world usage? I'd hope in the general case we use standard formatting? I have to admit I'm getting more than a little frustrated with what seems like a continual set of changes bouncing this format around in different directions :(. I agree and I'm sorry I missed this in my first change - I was just trying to make the time stamps be consistent. As far as I can recall (which is a really long time), 'date' has always wanted the format MMDDHHmm[], so I think that's what we should expect. That format doesn't compare easily which is why the timestamp was changed (not by me) to a more ISO standard MMDDHHmm. If busybox has 64-bit math enabled, then this can be compared with no problems, it just has to be munged into the format 'date' wants. -- Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates |Embedded world ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] initscripts: Properly handle new timestamp format
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:27, Gary Thomas g...@mlbassoc.com wrote: I think the best thing would be to turn CONFIG_FEATURE_DATE_COMPAT back on along with my reformatting change. I can make an updated patch if you agree. This is indeed the better solution. Please send an updated patch in meanwhile so Richard can apply it once he has some time and restore the right behavior. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] initscripts: Properly handle new timestamp format
On 2012-03-01 09:04, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:52, Gary Thomasg...@mlbassoc.com wrote: On 2012-03-01 08:44, Richard Purdie wrote: Is this going to cause us a problem in real world usage? I'd hope in the general case we use standard formatting? I have to admit I'm getting more than a little frustrated with what seems like a continual set of changes bouncing this format around in different directions :(. I agree and I'm sorry I missed this in my first change - I was just trying to make the time stamps be consistent. As far as I can recall (which is a really long time), 'date' has always wanted the format MMDDHHmm[], so I think that's what we should expect. That format doesn't compare easily which is why the timestamp was changed (not by me) to a more ISO standard MMDDHHmm. If busybox has 64-bit math enabled, then this can be compared with no problems, it just has to be munged into the format 'date' wants. So we can have compat and 64-bit math and have it properly behaving? Yes, I believe so. I'll work up the patch and test it now. -- Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates |Embedded world ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] initscripts: Properly handle new timestamp format
On 03/01/2012 06:06 PM, Gary Thomas wrote: As far as I can recall (which is a really long time), 'date' has always wanted the format MMDDHHmm[], so I think that's what we should expect. That format doesn't compare easily which is why the timestamp was changed (not by me) to a more ISO standard MMDDHHmm. If busybox has 64-bit math enabled, then this can be compared with no problems, it just has to be munged into the format 'date' wants. So we can have compat and 64-bit math and have it properly behaving? Yes, I believe so. I'll work up the patch and test it now. It might be very helpful for other developers if 64-bit math requirement of busybox would be documented somewhere. BR, Lauri ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
